calories burned accuracy

asgentr

I'm confused about calories burned. My elliptical machine shows a very low calorie burned count for even a rigorous half hour of work (120 calories), yet when I enter walking for the same amount of time on MFP it shows that I'm burning more than double that, which is impossible. I know some people just "walk" on the elliptical, but I really push it and sweat like a fountain. What gives?

myheartsabattleground

Nothing is TRULY 100% accurate.

strong_curves

It could be somewhere in the middle. That said, sweating a lot doesn't mean more calories burned.

SueInAz

Most exercise machines simply don't have enough information about you to give an accurate calorie burn. They use an average sized person and peanut butter that calorie amount across the board for everyone. It just doesn't know your level of effort. The walking and running, with MPH options, is probably the closest to matching my HRM than any other activity. If you really and truly want a calorie burn as close to accurate as possible (and there's nothing that's 100% accurate), get a heart rate monitor.

All of that said, both of those calorie counts seem a bit off. I highly doubt you're burning more than 240 calories for a half hour of walking. My HRM barely gives me more than that for running for 3 miles which takes me a little over a half hour. On the other hand, 120 for a half hour of elliptical seems a bit low but you're always better off underestimating calorie burns than overestimating them, anyway.

flamingblades

some people just eat back 1/2 of their calories from the daily burn to compensate for the overestimation from the MFP values.

Liftng4Lis

This is why most people only eat back half of their exercise calories.

callsitlikeiseeit

depending on your weight, 120 actually sounds about right (at least as far as what would be safe to eat back). in 30 minutes i generally burn 300 calories (based on hrm), and i typically eat back half of what i burn.

mfp burns (for me) are almost always way high. WAY high.

BasicGreatGuy

A heart rate monitor with a good device /app is more accurate than a home, gym machine or MFP, in my opinion.

DeguelloTex

Pick an estimate. Doesn't matter which one. Use it consistently. If you're gaining weight or losing too slowly, eat less. If you're losing too quickly, eat more. If you're right on track, you're good to go.

Ready2Rock206

Everything is going to be an estimate - but I'd say 120 for 1/2 hour on the elliptical sounds pretty legit. MFP gives crazy high calorie burns for most things so I'd be careful following them.

ashliedelgado

When I started I was very excited with what MFP told me I was burning.
When I wasn't losing weight, I decided to start editing the number, I cut it in half. I don't have a set number of calories that I eat back. I eat if my body tells me I'm hungry but if I hit my initial goal, hydrated, and worked out and I'm not hungry for anything more, I don't eat for the sake of eating. Doing this, I'm seeing better results.

Mr_Knight

asgentr wrote: »

I'm confused about calories burned. My elliptical machine shows a very low calorie burned count for even a rigorous half hour of work (120 calories), yet when I enter walking for the same amount of time on MFP it shows that I'm burning more than double that, which is impossible. I know some people just "walk" on the elliptical, but I really push it and sweat like a fountain. What gives?

Walking burn -> miles walked * weight in pounds * 0.3

So if you're 150 pounds walking 1.5 miles in 30 minutes you're burning an extra ~70 calories or so.

Mr_Knight

BasicGreatGuy wrote: »

A heart rate monitor with a good device /app is more accurate than a home, gym machine or MFP, in my opinion.

No, it's not.